Portrait time: Sample gallery from Sony's new 85mm F1.4 GM lens

After Sony showed off its a6300 and trio of new lenses, our staffers were able to grab an a7R II and start shooting. Above we've put together a small selection of images taken with Sony's new 85mm F1.4 GM portrait lens.

Nothing wrong with his writing. Everything wrong with your reading and comprehension.

They were saying quite clearly that their Nikon isn't as sharp at full aperture despite it being slower than the Sony. Anyone who didn't understand that from what was written doesn't have a good grasp of English.

Your original sarcasm was misplaced, you got found out but still keep digging.

There must be something very synergistic about the way the 85mm focal length interacts with the visible spectrum of light here on earth because every single 85mm lens is fantastic. I've never seen bad shots from one.

@ all the dudes here complaining about sample pictures being "uninspired" or in whatever else way "not good enough" to their standards:.Apparently, you guys forget that this was NOT a professional fashion shooting, where ONE photographer was shooting ONE model thousands of times over several hours, just to pick the best 5 pictures from perhaps 500+. Not to mention lack of control over lighting, model acting/posing etc.Moreover, you guys conveniently forget that the reviewers here were given equipment they never before had in their hands (entirely new lenses and to some of them possibly even the cameras) without any chance to get accustomed to the new tech. Tell me ONE professional photographer who gets entirely NEW gear, gets out, takes 20 shots and all them are masterpieces? In what delusional world are you living, or are you just hating for no reason?

And I always thought that fanboy-ism was constrained to the guys < 16 years of age.....

Is it really that hard to pick up a new camera and take as decent of a photo as you could with similar equipment of your own? Save a minute or two of learning which dials control aperture, shutter, ISO and focus.

I think people are being harsh on the images - it's good of the DPR staff to take some photos when they had they brief opportunity to do so with the lens.

I think a fair point though, is that I've very seldom seen anything on this site that could not be achieved by a competent photographer with gear from 2007 or earlier.

That's not really a criticism of the photography here - more a comment that I think we overemphasize the importance of the latest thing. That makes sense with a preview / review site, but it makes a nonsense really of the endless brand, format, megapixel, DR debates. Features are important and sometimes they'll enable you to get a key shot, however they're a means to an end not the end.

Because it turns out they were taken by DPR. Sony held a press event where they provided an opportunity for selected media outlets to try the new lenses. As a result similar photos may appear on a few other sites.

I'm more interested to see shot with the A7 and this glass, a Batis, a Sigma and a Canon shooting the same scenes in daylight. Personally, I really do not like the bokeh on the last shot and the last shot of the singer. It has the look of too much of a photoshop filter. Or a lens baby product.

I dont own shares in Canon Nikon or Sony and probably neither do you. If you have not done so already do your self a favour, go and try the Canon 85mm f/1.2l mk2 on a 6D or any modern camera. Set it to 1.2 take a few photos.

Or a full frame Nikon and their 85mm 1.4d or g.

Dxo Bark and Dippy review are not known for their photographic talent. They measure scores but have no idea how to translate this to real world photography, or how this relates to human perception or vision.

If you have ever used a long lens on a small camera body you will know how hard that is. So ensure your camera can balance the lenses you hope to buy.

I hope one day Sony will produce great cameras but they are not there yet. The human eye can only see about 10-11 stops of dynamic range under quick scanning conditions your screen or printing even less.

Few people can agree on how to measure dynamic range or how Iso can be compared evenly across all cameras.Or even how raw converters can be compared.

Hold your thumb at arms length the size of the thumb nail is the area that the human eye can see in focus at one time.

Thank You ! ! !Don't get me wrong, these are really great shots but I still think Fuji has the perfect storm in mirrorless right now. Small bodies, Small lenses, Great images! I don't even have a fuji and I feel this way. The 55MM lens Sony has is wonderful but these zooms and the 85mm are going to feel unwieldy.

I couldn't agree more! Guess I'm too old-school. Hold the lens in the left hand, trip the shutter on the body, regardless the mass, with the right hand--job done! Balance between longer and heavy lens and lightweight body? I don't see any issue here.

"The human eye can only see about 10-11 stops of dynamic range under quick scanning conditions your screen or printing even less."

So the DR that your eye can see in a sub-millisecond is more relevant than what your eye-brain actually sees of the whole scene after processing more than just one, sub-millisecond frame & actually 'taking in' the full scene?

You realize that our perception of the scene is from multiple averaged frames as our eyes spatially & temporally samples the scene, right?

Fascinating justification for the lack of need of technological progress. I suppose that for this shot, you'd prefer the default camera JPEG that would've undoubtedly rendered the foreground rocks a clipped black (or the clouds in the sky a clipped white)? Because in one instant, our eye only sees a limited range, despite the fact that if you were standing here, you'd see exactly what this image shows?

I am a 1DS and A7R II user, and started using the Canon 85L II and Zeiss 135 F2 APO on the A7R II regularly, I see no issue " balancing" between the lens and body, just like shooting 300mm big prime on 1DS3 body, lens is always supported by my left hand and right hand is always on the camera body.

Don't know exactly how many stops of DR human eyes can see, but I see huge different between what my 1DS3 and my Nikon 800E /A7R II can capture in my own daily landscape photo in terms of DR. I owned all 3 of those bodies, not based on any online review rating. i used GND a lot less these days with the D800E and A7R II with these two new cameras, in fact, using my two TSE 17 and 24 lenses on the high DR sensor for landscape is one of the main reason I piked up the A7R II.

Too pale? I'm curious. I've shot Nikon for years an switched to Sony for the past 12 months. I like the cooler, and in my opinion, more natural tones than what I have typically produced with Nikon gear. With Nikons, I was consistently too warm, similar to using an 81A or 81B filter back in the transparency days.

Every camera company has a signature. I had a Pentax I couldn't get along with even in RAW because of the colors. That's subjective. I could have developed profiles in lightroom to match what pleased me, but in the end I moved to Sony and am quite happy. The colors are better and developing takes less work without fiddling with profiles. But yeah, you can customize the color experience if you really wanted to, and sample pictures only show the default Sony profile. If another brand gives you the asian skin tones you like, no sense in doing the leg work to customize a profile unless you want what else Sony offers. There's also no sense in criticizing the colors or brand because this is highly subjective.

The Boxer on the left with the gray tank and white gloves...His glove lowest to the frame and in the background. There is Green Axial-CA. And in the glove of the blue tank boxer in the foreground has Magenta Axial- CA. Its not overly strong but its definitely there.

This is the bane of my work. I often shoot wide open and Axial-CA is very hard to correct without damaging the entire image especially if any part of my image has similar colors throughout that are not CA. This is why I shoot with Zeiss, its one of the best brands in the world when focusing on resolution and CA correction.

@ David - I can barely see that green CA you're talking about and I'm looking at the full sized images. I see it more on the other side in the magenta. But still, other than Otus, what lens is this good at f/2? I'm certain that neither Canon nor Nikon have this kind of correction.

I also use Zeiss, dating back to film days with Hasselblad 6x6. My current Sony Zeiss lenses produce CA from time to time, but the point I'd like to make is that my clients have never called me to complain about CA in my images.

I've had two clients complain complain about it. Blue green fringing and magenta was showing up in places that were supposed to be white and gold. Most embarrassing was the fringing on the brides dress. The second client pointed out where there was a gray outline on everything that was blue green and red throughout the photo. This was due to my attempt to correct axial fringing which is much more invasive and difficult to correct without damaging the rest of the image.

@David - Go Atlanta! What lens were you using that produced so much that your client could see it? And how did your first client see this before you corrected it? And with the second, you didn't see the result of your own correction before the client did? And I'm surprised they don't realize that it's quite normal. But again, what lens made it so bad?

Lens used was Rokinon 85mm f1.4 @1.4, This lens is a great starter for those new to portrait work but has terrible fringing and isnt all that sharp wide open. This is why Ive upgraded to the Carl Zeiss Batis as its fringing control is almost to the level of its own Otus line. Zeiss will always get my money before any other lens manufacturer.

With the second client the fringing was so bad that it was affecting faces, eyes, and clothing. The worst of it was on the clients glasses as they were a chrome finish against light brown skin in harsh sunlight. The fringing in and around the glasses frames were totally noticeable without looking closely. Had to do some heavy correcting and local correcting to remove but did damage to the entire image in places I had not considered it would. Most clients Ive worked with have no clue of physics and the limitations of photography lenses as all they mostly care about is price and perfection. To them they see it simply as an excuse. The Rokinon 85mm f1.4 is best used indoors or any low contrast lighting but even then it still has much stronger fringing than any other 85mm Ive ever used. Perhaps I may have just had a really bad copy. Again another reason why I will buy a Zeiss over all is that every copy is a great copy.

@David: That's a good and bad story. Glad the Zeiss works for you. I had a Nikon 85 1.8 and it has a fair amount even out to f/8 although mostly correctable. I now have 3 zeiss and one leica lenses I use on my A7 and you can't overemphasize the importance of low CA from the start.

Its long since known tat Canon is the worst when it comes to pre-cooked colors in their sensors. Canon always leans more on the magenta and yellow as its brand is more focused on portraits. Nikon and Sony are more neutral and hence more accurate but less visually pleasing as most prefer a warmer image.

But if arguing sensor tech and actual results...Canon leads in nothing. Worst of all shadow recovery/dynamic range.

These images and their poor colors are the shooter/processor not the camera. I get the must beautiful skin tones with my Sony system. Everything on my website is pretty much an A7r shot JPG. I don't shoot raw anymore. www.mikeallenphoto.com It doesn't help the fact that the lighting makes you feel awkward and weird and doesn't connect with any of the subjects at all.

learn how to edit colors yourself. You need the sensor that gives you the most information, an artist will do whatever they want in PP, just get the most info, dynamic range, color depth, etc. If you don't like the paler green tint play with the WB.

Yes canon tends to be more contrasty (low DR) just slide the contrast and clarity slider to the right in editing. Also more saturation, (less color depth) just slide the saturation or vibrate slider to the right also in LR or PS.

Sorry to say, but the rendering of skin in these portraits is very waxy. But I'm seeing the same thing in photos from the press event taken by other people using the 85mm, and with the other two newly-announced lenses.

The low ISO shots (like shot #1) look almost identical to the high[er] ISO shots (like shot #8)--like noise-reduction has flattened the tonality. I'm guessing that the cause of that waxiness has something to do with the quality the A7R II's jpegs. I would hate to find out that the waxy look is attributable to the way these G-Master lenses render.

I take it you're offering the linked photo as an example that doesn't suffer from the problem I've described. But I've never seen that photo before, so it couldn't have any bearing on my judgement about something which might be related to the lens' optical quality.

Having stated all that, I find the subject's skin in your linked photo to be as waxy as the others. If it looks good to you, then you're likely a lot closer to considering this lens as a purchase than I am.

I still hope that there's something other than the lens' rendering that explains what I'm seeing. I'm looking forward to getting hold of a RAW file.

Edit: But the rendering in your linked photo is different than the ones in the DPR gallery.

I think I've made it clear that I don't know what's accounts for the problem as I see it.

But since you asked, the waxy look can be the product of a rendering that fails to record subtle tonal transitions. Human skin is a complex blend of many tones, but when too few tones are represented in a photographic rendering of a human subject, the result can be a flatness in tonality that makes skin look like it's lacking in texture--like wax. If I'm not mistaken the particular characteristic lacking is "micro-contrast".

Using Thematic's supplied photo as an example, I see very little texture on the right side subject's face (camera left) except in the areas with highlights. And the transitions between tones, like in the shadow areas, are blotchy rather than smooth. Even accounting for the bad light, none of this is what I want to see in a sample photo taken with what is ostensibly a portrait lens. Obviously, others' tastes will vary.

I hadn't looked at the DPR gallery for many hours. Most of the samples on various websites taken by others who attended the same Sony press event are using these same models in these same settings. So I didn't recognize the crop as being made from one of the shots specifically from the DPR gallery.

But what was the point of showing me a crop of one of the shots in the gallery? I assumed that you were showing me a shot from elsewhere that you were claiming didn't manifest the problem.

And the difference in rendering to which I referred was that your crop actually looked even worse up close than the shots which I had already viewed at 100% magnification. I didn't want to discuss the overall softness and the muddy shadow areas because I'm more inclined to think that these might have some other explanation. I didn't want to be any more negative with my commentary than I needed to be, so I left it at noting that what I saw was "different."

I don't know what you think makeup has to do with flat tonality in a digital photo. And I wonder how much makeup you believe has been applied to the face, torso, and arms of the bearded tattooed man featured in one of the photos I referenced in my original post. But the (*ahem*) tonality of your comment suggests that you aren't really trying to discuss the issue anyway.

And, if I'm reading the closing of your comment correctly, you seem to think that I have some issue with Sony camera gear. The contents of my DPR gear list suggests differently.

It goes to show that after spending $1800 on this really large lens, most people will still get mediocre pictures like these. I am sure you reading this will get stellar award winning pictures though. :D

pixelMario, but what is the point? If you google pictures from a lens with hundreds of thousands of shots to choose from and compare them to a hasty first go of a new lens at a press event, then the chances of seeing something in the Canon lens to rave about is highly likely. I think his point is that when this lens gets into the hands of great photographers and there is a body of images to peruse, then we can see what the lens is capable of.

I rather Sony keep the BS on the down-low and focus on developing good hardware and lenses. Give me the products I need and I'll worry about making it look good. Did you see the Canon animated-robo-terminator video about the 1dx2? I wish they had saved the cost of that and included the wifi in the camera, for example.

Wow. That is really a nice lens. The bokeh look solid A quality and what's in focus wide open is crisp at 42MP, apparently even way off axis. Hate to say it, but this might actually be well worth its price... and that's not something I'd normally say about a lens in this price class. Sony hasn't done well in making cheap E-mount glass, but they certainly have been making sure that their high-end glass delivers.

Sorry, but sharpness wise I find the Batis much better when comparing to the samples here (but I would call it sharp enough). I still find 2000Euros a bit over the top. I can't see any shots showing exceptional bokeh here.

IMO the real stupid decision was to build it in the first place. I can't think of a lens the world needs less than another fast high rez 85mm prime. Then why go and compete with Zeiss? What it's needed is a competitor for the tamron 15-30/2.8VC, the sigma 18-35/1.8 and 20/1.4, and a dedicated fast-ultra wide for astro landscaping.

I am impressed. I guess those are OOC jpegs, I would compress the highlights in some of them; compose one or two slightly differently (the head not so close to the center in #5 and #8) but overall, very pleasant images both technically and artistically. #9 and #11 (the latter needs some work on the highlights) are the best, IMO.

CA looks very well controlled in #9, for example, where the harsh lighting could be easily a problem with a fast lens. Transitions from focus to OOF look very smooth.

Good shots, not all of them "portraits" though. No challenging lighting, no challenging backgrounds, hardly any close up work. Yes, I know Americans love the sterile, keep your distance, sort of portrait.

I don't see this lens stand out significantly from its competitors. Maybe its resolution (in MTF terms) will be better, but who cares for a portrait lens?

The CP+ show in Yokohama Japan has just ended and as usual, alongside new cameras, lenses, and elaborate booths, many of the manufacturers were showing off a bunch of things which had been cut in half. So in keeping with CP+ reporting tradition we stopped by some of the major booths and captured a few of the best examples. Take a look at all the things we found at CP+ which had been cut in half, 2016 edition. Read more

There are lots of new products vying for attention at CP+ 2016, including Sony's a6300 and new GM series lenses for its full-frame mirrorless cameras. And they are getting plenty of attention from show attendees, especially those eager to try out the FE 85mm F1.4 GM. We took another look at the a6300 and the GM lenses on display at the buzzing Sony booth in Yokohama. Read more

Just before CP+ 2016, we had the chance to get our hands on preproduction models of Sony's three new G Master lenses that sit above the existing G lenses in Sony's lineup. Our hands-on time on the show floor here at CP+ have allowed us to formulate a better opinion and one thing's becoming clear: we think Sony has good reason to make the recent claims they've made regarding the GM series. Read more

'We want to make lenses that can be used forever,' says a senior engineer of Sony's new G master lenses. At the launch of the ‘G Master’ range of high end lenses, we spoke to Motoyuki Ohtake, Distinguished Engineer in Sony’s Lens Design Department about the process and the philosophy behind the latest lenses. Read the interview

The Leica Q2 is a fixed-lens, full-frame camera sporting a new 47.3MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and replaces the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116), launched in 2015.

Fujifilm's GFX 50R takes the image quality from the existing 50S model and wraps it in a new body with new controls and a lower price of entry. Is that enough to tempt you to pick one up for yourself? Find out how the GFX 50R performs in our full review.

The Mavic Air hits the sweet spot for many drone users, combining compact size with high performance and good image quality. Find out what makes it so useful, and why it might just be the best travel-friendly drone on the market today.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Montana judge Dana L. Christensen has ruled the Republican National Committee did not infringe upon the copyright of photographer Erika Peterman after they took a photo from a Democratic candidate's Facebook page without permission and altered it to use in a derogatory promotional mailer.

Leica recently announced the Q2, a digital rangefinder with a fixed 28mm F1.7 lens. It's a heck of a lot of fun to shoot with, but is it right for you? Based on our time with the camera, and its specifications, we've examined how well-suited it is for common photography use-cases.

Now that our Panasonic Lumix S1R has final firmware, we couldn't wait to get out shooting with it - and we also tried the high-res mode, which combines files to get 187 megapixel images. Because sometimes, 47 megapixels just isn't enough.

Drones can be useful tools in urban areas, where they're utilized for everything from news reporting to building inspections, but flying in these areas requires careful preparation. Here's what you need to know to do so safely.